
XL 



eGNSBCRATttiS 



OF THE 



OLAMN CHAPEL 

BRIDGEPORT, IT. 




JL>£< 



JL>£< 




£!>e jfatjev, tye onlg proper object of Christian JKPoisjtfp. 



SERMON, 

PREACHED AT THE 

CO NSECRATION 

OP THE 

polancn Clja;pel, 

BRIDGEPORT, CT., 

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 4 , 1849. 



By FREDERICK A. FARLEY, 

PASTOR OF THE 

CHURCH OF THE SAVIOUR, 

BROOKLYN, N. Y. 

A 0- _________ 



NEW-YORK; 

PRINTED BY HENRY SPEAK, 78 WALL STREET. 
1849. 



ws 



SERMON. 



Luke IV, 8. 

And- Jesus answered and said — -"it is written, Thou- shalt worship the Lord 
thy GOD-, and Him only shall thou serve." 

John IV, 23. 
The true worshippers shall warship the FA THER. 

1 Cor. VIII, 6. 
To us, there is but One GOD, the FATHER. 

The public prints have given notice that this Chapel would be con- 
secrated at this hour, to the worship of the one living and true God, 
the Father. It was intended that this notice should be significant; 
and mark at once and at the outset, an important difference between 
the worship of this, and of other places of worship in this city. With a 
single exception,* the worship in all of them differs from that to be 
offered here, in having a different, object or objects to which it is ad- 
dressed. The difference in this respect, is a difference not acciden- 
tally, not by habit, but deliberately, and by design adopted. It is, I 
am bound in charity to presume, — it is a matter of conviction, on their 
part as much as on ours. Still there is the difference ; — in itself, im- 
portant: — as a matter of principle or conviction, important; — in its 
practical bearings and influence, very important too. They not only 
believe in what we deny, namely, a Trinity of Persons in the Godhead, 
the Father, the Son. and the Holy Ghost, each of whom is God, — but 
thev worship that Trinity, and they worship interchangeably each of 
the Persons. Enter on any Sunday morning a Protestant Episcopal 
Church, and yon will hear the congregation uniting in the following 
petitions; — 

* The Uniyersaiist Church, 



[ 2 ] 



" 0 God. the Father of Heaven, have mercy upon us, miserable 
sinners. 

" 0 God. the Son. Redeemer of the world, have mercy upon us. 
miserable sinners 

•* O God, the Holy Ghost, proceeding from the Father, and the Sun, 
have mercy upon us. miserable sinners. 

" 0 Holy, blessed, and glorious Trinity, three Persons and one God, 
have mercy upon us. miserable sinners." 

Bre long, the Litany proceeds, addressing the Son — 

" By the mystery of thy holy Incarnation ; by thy holy nativity and 
Circumcision; by thy Baptism. Fasting, and Temptation: 

" Good Lord, deliver us. 

" By thine Agony and bloody Sweat; by thy Cross and Passion; by 
thy precious Death and Burial ; by thy glorious Resurrection and As- 
cension ; and by the coming of the Holy Ghost : 

" Good Lord, deliver us. 7 ' 

Almost immediately, in the same Litany, follow these words — words 
in which all Christian worshippers can join ; — 

" We sinners do beseech Thee to hear us, 0 Lord God 
While it closes thus : — 

" Son of God. we beseech Thee to hear us ! 

" 0 Lamb of God. who takest away the sins of the world : 

li Grant us thy peace ! ? ' 

I pass by the Roman Catholic Church, since if you should happen to go 
there, the worship of the Trinity, of Christ, of the Virgin Mother of 
God. of Saints, being offered in a dead language, might not be so 
obvious to all of you. But among the other Protestant Churches, it is 
common, I have sometimes thought that it is becoming more common 
than once, to worship the Son, to worship Christ, the second Person of 
the Trinity, I will not say exclusively, but pre-eminently. It is indeed 
a very striking fact, that while some of the freest and most acute minds 
around us are rid. or are fast g< fdng rid, of the harsher and more 
repulsive features of Calvinism, even though ascriptions to Father. 
Son, and Holy Ghost, may close their prayers, the prayers themselves 
are very commonly, and to my own feelings, I must say. most offen- 
sively, addressed in great part to Christ; — the tendency seeming but 
the more direct toward the distinct worship and deification of the Son. 
We hold all this to be unscriptural error: directly opposed to the 



[ 3 ] 



instructions and the example of Christ and his Apostles, — and. I may 
add, to the practice of the primitive Church. And, therefore, of design 
and deliberately, do we this day consecrate this house, to the sole 
worship of the One living and true God, the Father. 

I shall proceed to justify this position,, and this act. In doing so r I 
am aware that you. my friends, of the like precious faith with myself, 
wdll be exposed to a wearisome repetition of that which to us is but 
the alphabet of the pure doctrines of the Gospel. But the occasion, 
viewed in strict connexion with the region of country in which this 
Chapel stands, must, be my apology, if apology I need. In this city, 
no name is more obnoxious than the one which we bear. No efforts 
are viewed with more disquiet or jealousy among the professedly 
religious portions of this community, than those which the doings of 
this hour and place betoken. I give our brethren of the so-called 
orthodox denominations around us all credit for sincerity: for a sin- 
cere belief that the holy horror which they express at the upspringing 
of a place for Unitarian worship in their midst, is just that which as 
good Christians they ought to feel. I stand here to-day, wholly uncon- 
scious of the slightest hostility towards them of any name. I will be 
as ready as any one, now and always, to do honor to whatever proofs 
of a true, living, ever-active piety, of an abiding devotion to the ser- 
vice of God and of man, they may show, however superior to any 
which we can present. But none the less •'"'earnestly'' shall I " con- 
tend for the faith once delivered to the saints" — for "the truth as it is 
in Christ Jesus" — for the pure worship of ''his God and our God, his 
Father and our Father." In " the liberty- wherewith Christ has made 
us free," I will, with whatsoever strength God has given me, resist 
and try to strip oft the error which has been made even for a^es to 
cling to Christ's holy Gospel, though banded hosts defend it, and hurl 
at me their loudest anathema and denunciation. God only grant, that 
it be in a spirit and temp-r becoming this now sacred place, and the 
ministry which I share ! 

This House is erected, and consecrated forever to Christian Wor- 
ship. I know that it is designed also for Christian Instruction: in- 
struction in the faith, doctrines, hopes, promises, requisitions, sanc- 
tions, of the Gospel of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. But my 
purpose is to speak of it, in reference to that which I deem its first, 
great, solemn design, as a "House of Prayer." as a place of worship ; 



[ 4 ] 



and that worship, specially, specifically, Christian worship; — wor 
ship, — the sublimest act of the soul — the loftiest privilege of a depen- 
dent spirit. What is worship ? It is that by which we escape and 
pass beyond the visible, the material, the temporal, and enter into 
communion with the unseen, the spiritual, and the eternal. It is that 
act, in which the noblest powers and affections of our nature are 
engaged in their highest exercise. It is that privilege, in the devout 
use of which, the fetters of sense, passion, and the world, seem to fall 
off ; and the felt presence of God in all the plenitude of His glorious 
being and attributes to be revealed. I do not say that this humble 
house, or any house " made with hands" however spacious or magnifi- 
cent, though it lift its dome or spire to the skies and enclose vast mul- 
titudes beneath its vaulted nave and arches, is the only place in which 
this sublime act may be worthily or acceptably performed, or this lofty 
privilege enjoyed. The religion in which we rejoice, confines wor- 
ship to no selected spots — bounds the Infinite by no local temple. 
Everywhere amid the outspread universe is His dwelling-place; — 
everywhere, therefore, may His presence be sought by the devout 
heart. Still it is no less true, that the humblest Christian Church tells 
of the nature, dignity, and destiny of man, as the most gorgeous and 
imposing temple of ancient Greece or Rome never told, though it stood 
in most exquisite proportions, covered all over — frieze, architrave, 
capital — with richest and most elaborate sculpture ; and, that to the 
consecrated altar set up and kept apart for the high uses of Christian 
worship, the rightly disposed soul loves ever to turn; aye, and yet 
more and more as time, and years, and the changes of life, and the 
great lessons of religious experience, roll on and make impressions 
upon it. Especially will it be so, if there a new lig-ht first dawned 
upon the waking spirit — if there the spell of prejudice was broken — 
the hold of the world loosened — the fountains of repent ance opened — 
the deep cravings within for light and truth and deliverance met paid 
satisfied — the love of God, the love of Christ, the love of man, the love 
of duty, kindled up and inspired — and the hope of heaven brought in, 
and made the "sure and steadfast anchor of the soul" amid the trials 
and storms of life. And all this, we trust and pray, shall yet be felt 
by multitudes here ! 

Thus much I say of this house in general, — that it is erected as a 
place for worship. But specially, specifically, I repeat, for Christian 



[ 5 ] 



worship. All worsbip implies an Object of worship ; and Christian 
worship, of course, implies that Object to which the Christian Religion, 
or Christ himself its Great Founder, directs the supremo homage and 
service of his disciples. The several passages which I have placed at 
the head of this discourse taken together, seem overwhelmingly clear 
as to this point; and taken apart, abundantly so. In the first, the 
■Saviour himself adopts and reiterates, by his own divine authority, 
that explicit comma ad of the elder dispensation — "Thou shalt worship 
the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve!" This alone were 
enough. But in the second, Jesus declares of himself and originally, 
the rule of the new dispensation which he had brought in; — "The 
time is coming, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship 
the FatheFv.." Again, I say, this alone were enough. But if any doubt 
remain upon the question, whether "the Father" be not " the Lord 
God" of whom in the first text the Saviour had spoken, the third text, 
— words of the inspired Paul, of themselves too, enough, — declares in 
opposition to any multiplicity of gods more .or less, " to us, there is but 
One God, the Father." Demonstration itself could scarcely make it 
clearer, that the Scriptural Object of Worship is One, undivided, 
unrivalled, alone — "the Lord thy God" — "one God" — in one person, 
"the Father." 

Had we only the light of nature, our Eeason, which according to a 
multitude of circumstances might vary very widely in its suggestions 
to different individuals or communities, would nevertheless be our 
guide. But it is not so. We have the light of Revelation. That great 
boon which the wisest and most spiritual of ancient sages coveted for 
the race, has been granted to us. The beloved Son of God, the " sanc- 
tified and sent" of the Father, "full of grace and truth," has come into 
the world, and made known the Divine Will. " To him must we go, 
for he has the words of eternal life." Let Councils and Churches and 
Creeds decree what they may, let multitudes and majorities echo and 
assent to and strive to uphold their decrees, the more urgent the need, 
the more pressing the call, for every devout and faithful seeker after 
the truth, to go apart and consult for himself the sure 4 'oracles of 
God;" to go to the Scriptures, in which are recorded our Lord's own 
directions to his followers; and thus gain the all-supporting assurance 
that while he obeys them, he is safe and "blessed in his deed." 

Now in regard to the Scriptures, one thing is most certain, and must 



[ 6 ] 



be admitted by all, that in the Old Testament, but One Object of 
Supreme Worship, One God in one Person, is revealed; and that 
most frequent, express, and solemn are its injunctions against wor- 
shipping any other being whatsoever. Under the light of the 
Mosaic dispensation, the Jews were living at the advent of Christ ; 
and at that time, as in all ages to this very hour, worshipped accord- 
ingly "the Lord God of their fathers," and Him only. Did Jesus ever 
during his entire ministry, in a single instance, directly or indirectly 
change that Object of Worship— point worship to any other Being — or 
declare that that Being existed, however mysteriously, in more than 
one person, whether in three or three thousand ? I deny that he did. 
I deny it utterly, unqualifiedly ; and challenge contradiction. 

What did he say on the subject ? Bear with me, my friends, while 
I quote ; for though you and I are satisfied that the general, the 
uniform tenor of Scripture is with us, yet our brethren who differ from 
us will hold us, and rightly, to its special language. What then, I ask, 
did Christ say of the Object of Worship ? So far from proposing to 
change the Object of Worship which Moses had declared, — so far 
from pointing out defects either in the declaration of Moses, or in the 
Jewish belief on this subject, — he repeats to the tempter, just as he 
was himself entering his public ministry, the very words of the ancient 
Covenant — " Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only 
shalt thou serve!" In confirmation of this, and also that Jesus dis- 
tinctly taught that the God of the Jews is the God who is still to be 
worshipped, I remind you of his Ian guage to the "woman of Samaria," 
when, identifying himself with his Jewish countrymen he said — " we 
know whom we worship, for salvation is of the Jews." Jesus thus 
recognised and taught as the only proper Object of the supreme hom- 
age of his followers, the same and Only Being whom the Jews had 
been taught to worship, and of whom this great Lawgiver had com- 
manded, — " Thou shalt worship no other God !" 

It is not, however, to be supposed that Jesus did not enlighten the 
world in regard to the Object of Worship ; upon God's relations to us 
and ours to Him; so as at once to help us in our infirmities when we 
approach Him, and to make the service more attractive and more 
elevating. Directly the reverse. In the Old Testament, the names or 
titles usually applied to God are august and awful ; implying the gran- 
deur, power, and majesty of the Supreme : — the Almighty — the God of 



[ 7 1 



hosts — the mighty and terrible God — the Lord most High. He is 
described as possessing "terrible majesty;" as surrounded "with 
clouds and darkness." Sublime beyond that of any uninspired bard, 
yet profoundly fearful, is that remarkable description of the prophet : 
— "His brightness was as the light. * * * * * Before Him went 
the pestilence, and burning coals went forth at His feet. He stood, 
and measured the earth ; He beheld, and drove asunder the nations ; 
and the everlasting mountains were scattered, the perpetual hills did 
bow. ***** The mountains saw Thee, and they trembled ; 
the overflowing of the water passed by; the Deep uttered his voice, 
and lifted up his hand on high. The sun and the moon stood still in 
their habitations; at the light of thine arrows they went, and at the 
shining of Thy glittering spear. Thou didst march through the land 
in indignation; Thou didst thresh the heathen in anger!" — Now you 
search in vain among the words of Christ for anything like this. But 
what do you find there? One, all-endearing, most attractive, pro- 
foundly touching image, — that of "the Father!" This, so to speak, is 
his favorite, constantly recurring title of God. In the brief transcript 
of the Evangelists of his sayings while on earth, he calls the Being 
who had sent him on his great mission of love to our race, some twenty- 
six times, God; but some one hundred and thirty-six times, "the 
Father." It is true that in the Old Testament, God once or twice is 
called "a Father," while the character of a Father as belonging to 
Him, is in several passages implied ; and, that from the whole collec- 
tion of books comprised in it, as touching representations of the Divine 
Being and His dealings with men may be gathered, as can be con- 
ceived. But in the New Testament, and especially in our Lord's 
teachings, God is ever "the Father;" not by name or title only, but 
in His views, purposes, and intercourse with mankind. And that 
"the Father" is always the Being and the only Being whom he direct- 
ed his followers to worship, is manifest both from his precepts and his 
example. It is expressly recorded, that on one occasion the disciples 
came and asked him to "'teach" them "to pray." It is a natural sup- 
position, that, as devout Jews, they were anxious to know whether 
any new Object of prayer was to be presented to them by their mas- 
ter. They had been accustomed to worship the One God in One 
Person, Jehovah ; and they knew nothing of any three persons in the 
Godhead, or of what is now called the Trinity. What, then, did 



C 8 3 



Christ reply? Taking several separate petitions from prayers already 
familiar to the chosen people, he arranged them in a simple formu- 
lary, and directed their minds as they were wont, to One, distinct 
Person or Being, as the Great Object of Prayer : — " He said unto them, 
when ye pray, say. Our Father which art in Heaven ! }f Now, here 
was the very occasion of ail others, we should think, upon which he 
would have seized had truth required it, to direct them to the new 
revelation which it is often alleged that he came to make, of One God 
in Three distinct Persons. Father. Son, and Holy Ghost; of the Trinity, 
that is — Three Persons and One God, as the new Object or Objects 
of Prayer. But not. a word or hint of such a thing. Never, in one 
instance did he speak of a Trinity : much less of worshipping a Trini- 
ty, or himself, or the Holy Ghost, but "the Father" only. This 
endearing name of " Father" is made the special title by which God 
is to be addressed: and the humblest child of God's grace and bless- 
ing is taught, in the simplicity and confidence of a child, to say, — 
"Our Father!" 

Need I show how perfectly, how uniformly the practice of cur Lord 
corresponded to his teaching ? Who more devout than Jesus? And 
yet how always did he pray to "the Father!" When he gave utter- 
ance to his gratitude, his language was — "I thank Thee. O Father, 
Lord of heaven and earth !" When he felt that miraculous power had 
been granted to him to recall his friend Lazarus to life, again he said 
— " Father. I thank Thee !" When his soul was " troubled" his prayer 
was — "Father, glorify Thy name!" And when the deadly agony 
bowed him to the earth, it was — *° O my Father, if this cup may not 
pass away from me except I drink it. Thy will be done !" Before this, in 
that longest of his prayers, recorded by the beloved Apostle, six times 
does he address God by the same title. While the soldiers were nail- 
ing him to the cross, he prayed — "Father, forgive them!" And the 
last words which fell from his blessed lips, were — " Father, into Thy 
hands I commend my spirit ;" f 

This is the way in which the Saviour, whom all Cniistians are com- 
manded to honor and to imitate, prayed. ?Cever, in a single instance, 
did he prav or teach to pray, to what in modern phrase is called, his 
divine nature, or to the Holy Ghost ; but to the Father always, and to 
the Father only. " The true worshippers. " said he to the Samaritan 
woman, <l the true worshippers shall worship the Father," — If anything 



C 9 i 



more pointed or explicit be asked for, let it be remembered thai when 
he was about to "leave the world and go to the Father," he took 
special care to warn his disciples against praying to himself. They 
had been wont to look to him directly and constantly for instruction 
and aid; "Lord, increase our faith!" — for deliverance in lang r; 
"Lord, save us, we perish!'' — "Lord, help me, or I sink!" — He had, 
as God's representative, been at hand to respond to such < • fitions. 
Now he was going away; and lest they should suppose thai they 
misrht continue in the same way to seek his help, and careful to direct 
their homage and reverence to, and to impress them with a sense of 
their dependence on Him who had sent him, he expressly forbids 
them to pray to himself: — "in that day, ye shall ask me nothing. 
Verily, verily, I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my 
name, He will give it you." How, I ask, how more effectuaLy, had 
that been his special design, could he have forbidden the worship of 
any other being besides the Father ? 

So in "the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to 
show unto his servants," there are two remarkable passages most 
direct to the point under consideration. John " fell at his feet to wor- 
ship him." But Jesus said to him— "See thou do it not ! I am thy 
fellow-servant, of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep 
the sayings of this book : Worship God !" — Again did John make the 
same attempt ; and again in the same way was he forbidden.* Thus 
clearly and explicitly, did our Lord Jesus Christ prohibit all worship 
of himself or of any other being, and direct it to be rendered solely 
and exclusively to the Father. 

After the Ascension, the instmctions and the practice of the Apostles 
exactly coincided with those of their Master. Almost immediately 
after that stupendous event, we find them "lifting nr> their voices to 
God with one accord, and saying, Lord, thou art God ! which host 
made heaven and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is." They 
speak of the rulers being "gathered together against the Lord and 
against his Christ."—" For," they add, "of a truth against Thy holy 
child Jems, whom Thou hast anointed." Who does not see that they 
here strictly followed the injunction of Christ, and worshipped his 
God and Father?— Paul, though "caught up to the third heaven" and 
illumined by special communion with his Master, still "bowed his 
* Chap, xix, 1C— xxii. 8, 9.— Yid. also. Chap. xiv, 6, 7-xr, 3. 4- 



[ to ] 



knees unto the Father of .our Lord Jesus Christ:" — still gave " thanks 
always for all things unto God even the Father, in the name of our 
Lord Jesus Christ :" — still " thanked God always for the grace of God 
given by Jesus Christ," and blessed ?? God. even the Father of our 
Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort." 
— So Peter instructs those to whom he writes, to " call on the Father;" 
and blesses "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." — James 
declares of the tongue — " therewith bless we God, even the Father." 
— John wishes "Grace" unto his converts, "from God, the Father;" 
and in the first verse of Jade's epistle, we read of "God the Father." 
There is no exception to this mode of teaching or of worship, in the 
Epistles. That "to us, there is but One God, the Father," as express- 
ed by Paul in my text, was the sentiment uppermost and ever cherish- 
ed in the minds of the writers. 

The sentiments and the practice of the early Church, correspond 
with those of Christ and the Apostles as here exhibited. To this fact 
we have Trinitarian testimony. One of the most eminent prelates of 
the English established Church (Bishop Bull) says — " In the first and 
best ages, the Churches of Christ directed all their prayers, according 
to the Scriptures, to God only, through the alone mediation of Christ."* 
This statement is all the more valuable, because it was incidentally 
made ; and was no: mtended as testimony, but merely to illustrate the 
unauthorised prayers of the Romish ritual. It is fully confirmed by 
Justin Martyr, who flourished about the middle of the second century ; 
and who although the first to corrupt the pure Christian doctrine in some 
important particulars, nevertheless declares — "There are no nations 
on the earth, in which prayers and thanksgivings are not put up to the 
Maker and Father of all things, through the name of Jesus who vvas 
crucified. * * * * In ail our oblations, we bless the Maker of all 
things, through His Son." Irenaeus, some thirty years after Justin, in a 
prayer calls upon 'the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" as "the only 
mid true God, above whom there is no God." — And Origen, some 
sixty years later still, explicitly says — " We ought not. to pray to any 
omj of those things which are made, nor to Christ himself, but only to 
the God and Father of all, to whom our Saviour himself prayed as I 
observed before, when he teacheth us to pray, not to himself but to 
the Father saying, 'Our Father which an in heaven V " 
* Dr. S. Clarke's Scrip. Doctrine of the Trinity, p. 435. 



I 11 ] 



Such is the testimony in behalf of the gr^a t. and sol Finn duty of con- 
fining our supreme homage and worship to One God in One Person, 
the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, drawn from the exprf^s 
instructions, and the uniform practice of both Christ and his Apostles, 
and of the early Church. The amount of testimony might easily .be 
swelled from all these sources- In the New Testament, its uniform 
tenor directs all prayers to be offered to God the Father; while 
the testimony already cited is enough, and more than enough, to 
forbid the worship of Christ, as God, or the Holy Ghost as G==d, 
or a mystical and mysterious Trinity of three persons in the God- 
head. Th<* worship of the " One God, the Father" — that august 
and gracious Being whom our Lord himself described in prayer to 
Him, as "the Only True God" — is the only pure and Scriptural wor. 
ship; and therefore, to such worship alone, is this house consecrated. 

I am aware of the answer which may have already suggested itself, 
in the minds of some of my hearers, to this entire argument — namely 
that our Lord Jesus Christ when on earth was worshipped, and that 
he accepted the worship. But do we at this day need for the first 
time to learn, that the word rendered "worship" in our English Bible, 
is a word of ambiguous import ; the special significance of which is in 
every case to be gathered from the connexion in which it occurs ? It 
sometimes denoted merely civil homage or respect. In the Old Testa- 
ment (1 Chron. xxix, 20) we read — "and all the congregation fell 
down and worshipped the Lord and the King." They paid civil hom- 
age to the monarch, while they adored their God. — Again (2 Sam. 
ix, 6) we read, that " Mephihosheth did reverence" to the King David ; 
which of course- meant that he paid hirn obeisance, or the usual out- 
ward tokens of respect. But in another place, (Psalm xcv. 6) the 
word in this rendered "did reverence." is rendered " worship;" — 
" O come, let us worship the Lord our Maker." Here of course it de- 
noted the homage due onlv to God. So, in the New Testamem. Christ 
in one of his parables represents the servant as falling down and wor- 
shipping his lord and master. — Again, the word was used to express 
the homage or reverence due to prophets or messengers of God ; as in 
the book of Daniel (n. 46) w«> read, that " Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his 
face and worshipped Daniel." This was the homage rendered and 
specially due to Christ, as the best beloved and m st illustrious 
prophet and messenger of the Almighty. — And finally, the word in 



t 12 ] 



question denoted, as in the passage already quoted from the Psalms. 

that Religious Service which is due only io God. A similar ambiguity 
pertained to the English word " Vv-orship" at the time when our trans- 
lation was made, as any reader oi the English authors of that age 
well knows. Christ while on earth was indeed worshipped, and he 
accepted the worship. Admit it, and what then ? He was worshipped 
and he accepted the worship, because he knew that it expressed, and 
was intended to express, only that respect and homage which were 
due to him in his divine office of the Messiah, as the great Representa- 
tive and Messenger of the Most High; in the glowing language of the 
ancient Clement in his epistle to the Corinthians, as " the sceptre of 
the majesty of God." We have a striking instance of this, recorded by 
the evangelist Matthew. Jesus had trod the rough waters of the 
Galilean sea, and by a word stilled the storm. "Then they that were 
in the ship came and worshipped him, saying — • of a truth thou art the 
Son of God !' " These words of the awe-struck and wondering disciples, 
show beyond all question what their action meant. They paid him 
homage, not as God, but as " the Son of God, On another occasion, be- 
fore referred to, when he perceived that John, over-awed by the stupen- 
dous Revelations which he had made to him, fell at his feet to offer him 
the homage due only to his Father, of whose unrivalled supremacy he 
was ever mindful, he exclaimed — "See thou do it not! Worship 
God !" — If anything more be wanted to prove, that Christ though wor- 
shipped, was not worshipped as God, but as His Prophet and Messen- 
ger, let it be remembered how jealous the Jewi sh people were at that 
time and always, of everything which in the least degree savoured of 
trenching upon the religious worship of Jehovah; and how instantly 
the popular indignation would have been kindled against any who 
should have presumed to offer such worship to a man, as they deemed 
Jesus. Jesus, however, was in some sense worshipped; often, openly, 
publicly, iu the streets of Jerusalem, hi the precincts of the temple, in 
the very presence of the cavilling Pharisees and his most watchful 
enemies. And yet, not an objection was made.> Is it credible, that 
no objection would have been made—that no special process would 
have been had. either against those who offered the worship, or Jesus, 
or both, — promptly, nay, instantly, if it had been understood that the 
one adored him as Jehovah, or that the other as such accepted the 
adoration ? 



[ «3 ] 



The argument of my discourse, has grown to a length altogether 
yond my expectation. I alluded in the outset to a practice, common 
among some other denominations, apparently becoming more common 
in their pulpits, of paying direct, supreme worship to Christ. I am 
aware that this practice is well warranted by their creeds; perfectly 
consistent with them ; ifay, d em '.inch d by them. If Christ, as those 
creeds assert, be Gob, men, o£ c rsd, he should be worshipped as 
Goo. The "final appeal, however, is not to those creeds, but to Holy 
Scripture. I am not on the one hand, for magnifying the differences 
which separate us from other Christians; but on the other, I am none 
the more for depreciating them. I am for seeing them just as they 
are, and speaking of them just us they are, both on the score of honest 
conviction, and of a true, charity. I believe those differences en some 
points to be important differences, and on the one under consideration 
not the least so. On that point, one thing is certain. Either our 
brethren of the so-called Orthodox denominations, are wrong, — or, we 
are. If on a sober and careful examination of Scripture, there be no 
warrant for their worship of Christ,, or of the Holy Spirit, or of the 
Trinity, then they are wrong; and no array of numbers or antiquity, 
no assumption of authority however bold or imposing, can prove them 
right. If on the contrary all worship except that of the Father be there 
expressly forbidden, and that alone as expressly enjoined, then we are 
right; and no allegation that we are in the minority, can prove us 
wrong. There is no alternative. I rejoice, however, to think, that 
the vast body of Trinitarians after ail have, at heart, a more evangeli- 
cal faith than that which their creeds express; that to them as to us, 
the term " Father ' in addressing God. comprehends in fact not the 
first person of a Trinity only, but all that is involved in the great idea 
of God, or the Deity. I know, indeed, that in the petitions which I 
cited before from the Litany of the Protestant Episcopal Church, the 
worshippers professedly adore God the Father" — "God the Son" — 
and "God the Holy Ghost;" — nay, nor only so. but a "Holy, blessed, 
and glorious Trinity, three persons and one God." But what portion 
of the multitudes that from Sabbath to Sabbath hear and respond to the 
last three of these petitions, have ever seriously reflected upon their 
import and bearing — ever independently, and on their accountableness 
to God, attempted to reconcile them with Scripture — ever seriously 
inquired into their origin or authority ? To the generally Scriptural 



[ '4 1 



worship of the Liturgy of that Church. I gladly bear witness. The 
prevailing form of address or invocation in its prayers, is certainly 
such ; and in most of the prayers themselves, we, as a Christian deno- 
mination, can heartily unite. What more Scriptural, for example, 
than where in the Collect for the eighteenth Sunday after Trinity, the 
petition is — "with pure hearts and minds to follow Thee, the Only God, 
through Jesus Christ our Lord ?" Or, in that for the next Sunday; — 
" mercifully grant, that Thy Holy Spirit may in all things direct and 
rule our hearts,, through Jesus Christ our Lord ?" In the Comma- 
nion Service, too, how admirably is that view of the Great Object of 
Christian worship which we hold, expressed, and how exactly accor- 
dant with Scripture! — "It is very meet, right, and our bounden duty, 
that we should at all times, and in all places, give thanks unto Thee, O 
Lord, Holy Father, Almighty, Everlasting God !" And yet, the 
rubric directs that "these words Holy Father must be omitted on 
Trinity Sunday !" Why, why, let me ask, except that for consistency's 
sake, on the day set apart specially to honor and glorify "the Trinity" 
— the Trinity, a thing totally unknown, unheard of, in Scripture, — that 
peculiar and most attractive title by which Christ addressed, and taught 
his followers to address God, in prayer, and therefore, pre-eminently 
Scriptural, must be omitted, lest peradventure it seem to conflict with 
the dogma on which the service of that day is based ! — In other Trini- 
tarian Churches, the prayers in general begin by addressing God, often 
as Father ; but too often they mingle up direct addresses to Christ, and 
the Holy Spirit, to each of them as God ; and close with ascriptions to 
the Three Persons of the Trinity, just as contrary to the Apostolic prac- 
tice recorded in Scripture, as the perpetually recurring Gloria of the 
Roman, and of the Anglo-C?it\io\ic or Protestant-Episcopal, Churches. 

My special object has not been to refute the dogma of the Trinity of 
Persons in the Godhead, but to urge the true Scriptural worship of the 
Father, and the Father alone, as the One only living and true God ; — 
a position, fatal, I am well aware, to that widely received and cherish- 
ed dogma. To that worship, the worship of the Father, do we conse- 
crate this house. — The worship of the Father ! Words cannot express 
the thrilling joy, the divine peace, the simple and affectionate trust, 
with which the thought of God as the Father, fills the soul which 
truly receives and faithfully cherishes it ! To set apart a particular 
place for worship, may at first seem to imply something merely formal, 



[ 15 ] 



or lu least outward, But when the Great Object of that worship, is 
revea^d, and felt to be the Father; — when it is felt that the Infinite 
Being, He who "inhabiteth eternity" — who is "from everlasting to 
everlasting" — who " dwelleth in light inaccessible and full of glory" — 
has condescended so richly to the weakness of our nature, as to declare 
Himself to be " Our Father" and invite us into the ?/ glorious liberty of 
children.' ? thus binding us to Himself in the chords of an unutterable 
love, — how immediately does w T orship become an inward and heavenly 
spirit; the communion of the soul with its Great Source, freely, trust- 
fully, affectionately, as the child with its parent ; until the work of 
assimilation is begun and grows, and by this intercourse of the Human 
with the Divine, "we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the 
glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to 
glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." 

To this filial, joyous, affectionate worship, ever sacred be this place ! 
In rendering it, most truly shall we honor him, our ever blessed 
Saviour, who, by revealing the Father, has introduced us to this grate- 
ful, delightful service. O may these walls reared in faith in that 
Saviour — a faith which cheered, guided, and sanctified the pious 
dead,* and which is the joy, and staff, and support of the venerable 
living — ever testify, that though Christ be not worshipped and adored 
here, he is most truly, affectionately, reverentially honored! May ad- 
miration for his unclouded and spotless righteousness — gratitude for 
all that he did and suffered for the salvation of mankind — desires and 
efforts to obey him. as his own, as the great test of love, springing up 
spontaneously and warming the hearts of the worshipper — ever keep 
this house from becoming a place of forms ! Here ever be that wor- 
ship "in spirit and in truth" which is acceptable to God, and conform- 

* The allusion is to the Hon. Roger Gerard Van Polanen, who died at Bridgeport 
Sep:. 9. 1833. aged seventy-sis years, having resided in this country thirty -four years. 
His Pastor, the Rev. VYm. Vfare, in " a Mermen preached in the First Congressional 
Church in Chambers Street, New York, on the Sunday following his death — of which 
church, Mr, Tan Pola v ien had almost from the first been a most respected member — 
says ; — " If he had a joy ac last, it was inspired by the religion of Jesus ; if he had a 
hope, it grew out of the Gospel ; if he sued for mercy, it was through the promises of 
Christ."' He was truly a most accomplished man, and exemplary ! hristian ; and his 
testimony to the truth and paramount worth of the Unitarian view of the Gospel was 
most decisive. Mr. Ware tells us in the same sermon that he " said, he believed he 
should still have continued to the end a believer in Christianity, though an unhappy 
one, if he had never heard of that form of it, which, for the last twenty years of his life 
he had embraced and esteemed as his chief possession ; but that he could not adequate- 
ly describe the great accession that had been made to his happiness, after he became 
fully acquainted with the religion of the New Testament as he last received it. This 
supplied every want, cleared up every doubt, swept away every cloud."— This Chapel, 
erected by his widow, bears his name in grateful and respectful memory of his faith 
and virtues. 



C 16 ] 



ed to the instructions and example of Christ ! And when the venera- 
ble founder of this Chapel, having, by the blessing of the Fath^ whom 
she adores, been long permitted to share in its devout services,, and 
enjoy its sacred associations and privileges, shall have been called to 
rejoin the spirit of him whose memory she would piously embalm in 
this freewill offering to God, to the religion of the Saviour, and to the 
spiritual welfare of those who may gather here ; — when the voices 
which have first stirred its echoes shall have long ceased to be heard 
on earth; still may humble, penitent, grateful, obedient worshippers 
of the Father and disciples of His Son, continue from generation to 
generation to tread these courts, until all meet hereafter in "a Temple 
not made with liaiicU — Amen. 



Note. — I hare been told that after the deliver^ of this discourse, it was said by some 
of the hearers by war cf objection to my argument that I had taken no notice what- 
ever of the text 1 John. 5. 7, commonly called the text of the Three Heavenly Wit- 
nesses. Of course I did not ; for whatever else is to be said of that text, it has nothing 
to do with my precise purpose. 

But perhaps it may be well to avail of this opportunity of stating very briefly the 
reasons why I reject "that text, as being a mere interpolation, and no part of the writings 
of the beloved Apostle : and therefore never to be cited or quoted in argument upou 
any occasion where any doctrine of Christianity is under discussion 

Before the fifteenth century no Greek manuscript cf Joan's Ipistle.and before the 
ninth no Latin one, has it. — No ancient version has it No Greek ecclesiastical writer 
cites it, although many such writer.- quote and argue from the sixth t.nd eighth verses 
in support of the dogma of the Trinity. — No early Latin "Father cites ic— Near the end 
x of the fifth century it is first cited by Vigilius. a writer of no account, and even by him 
is thought to be forged.— Luther the Reformer omits it in his German' version, and many 
editors since the Reformation Erasmus in his editions of 1^16 and 1519 omitted it : and 
afterwards inserted it in 1522, because he had promised to insert it if a single Greek 
MS. containing it could be found Such a one was found at Dublin ; of which no writer 
pretends to assign an earlier date rhan the 13th, and most attribute it to the close of the 
loth century Char.es Butler, the learned Romanist and of course a Trinitarian, says 
of thisM?. that !i it is neither of sufficient antiquity nor of sufficient integrity, to be 
entitled to a voice in a question in sacred criticism " — Zuiuglius rejected ic ; and Calvin 
though he retained, speaks very doubtfully of it. In the Old English Bibies previous 
to between 1556 and 1580, it was printed in small types or in brackets. 

In modern days, VVetsiein. Griesbac-h Simon, Michaelis, Harwcod, .Vatthaei, reject 
it. Buliinger, Boyev. Knapp, mark it doubtful. Bishop Lowth denies the use of his 
understanding to him who defends it. Dr. Middleton, the late Bishop of Lincoln, Arch- 
bishop Newcome, Bishop *>I rsh. Bishop Bloomfield, Prof. Porson, and many others, all 
of the Church of England, reject it. Home, of the same church, after having main- 
tained its genuineness in the first edition of his Introduction, abandons it as spurious 
in the second. Adam Clarke, the Methodist Commentator, sums up his examination of 
it by saying — ,{ In short, ic stands on n r - authority sufficient to authenticate any part of 
a revelation professing to have come from God."' The Eclectic Review, long the « rgan 
of the English Dissenters, says—" VTe are unspeakably ashamed, that any modern 
divines should have contended for retaining a passage so indisputably spurious/' The 
London Quarterly Reviewers, champions of the British Church, and the British Criiic 
its avowed organ, reject it utterly . Prof. Stuart of cur own country . is known to have 
declared to his theological classes at Andcver, that i: the spuriousness of this passage 
has done more harm to the doctrine of the Trinity, than a thousand Unitarian 
preachers." 

I have quoted only Trinitarian writers : and on Trinitarian authority alone, do I pro- 
nounce this text " unquestionably spurious." 

And as to its interpretation, supposing i: to be genuine, rrinitarians also sha'I be our 
expositors ; for Calvin says that the expression " these three are one** must signify 1 in 
agreement, and not in essence.*' Beza says the same, And Macknight says in by 
paraphrase of ths passage,— these three are one, in respect of the, unity of thtir 
testimony." 



